The Uttar Pradesh government has become the subject of criticism over its decision last week to suspend a young civil servant, Durga Shakti Nagpal, allegedly for ordering the destruction of a wall that was to form part of a mosque.

Activists and some politicians have accused the administration of concocting the wall incident as an excuse to oust Ms. Nagpal, after she apparently took steps to crack down on illegal sand mining in the state.

The Samajwadi-Party-led state government has begun an investigation against Ms. Nagpal, refusing to reconsider the decision to suspend her.

The Wall Street Journal spoke to Akhilesh Yadav, chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, to discuss the case that has brought his administration under scrutiny. In a telephone interview conducted in Hindi late Monday, Mr. Yadav defended his decision.

Edited excerpts.

The Wall Street Journal: Why did you suspend Durga Shakti Nagpal?

Akhilesh Yadav: First, let me say that we are conducting an investigation into the incident. We have filed a charge sheet [list of allegations] and Ms. Nagpal has been asked to respond to it.

It is important to understand the situation in Uttar Pradesh. In the last five months, many incidents have taken place that led to violence.

Last week in Meerut, some people were listening to bhajans [Hindu devotional songs] and another group wanted to read the namaz [Islamic prayers.] A debate started and a shot was fired. In the fighting that ensued, two people died on the spot. [WSJ: It was not possible to immediately, independently verify these incidents.]

In Saharanpur, two Muslims met with an accident, a fight erupted and it became a huge problem. This is the environment in Uttar Pradesh.

In this particular case [involving Ms. Nagpal], some Muslim leaders of that town had spent several months collecting donations to build a mosque and no one had raised any complaints, so they built a wall.

Ms. Nagpal arrived on the scene one day and ordered that the wall be pulled down. She said, “I won’t move till the wall is demolished.” She was present when it was demolished; she can’t deny that. Even some villagers have said she was there till the wall was brought down. [WSJ: Ms. Nagpal could not be reached for comment.]

After this happened, a Muslim leader announced that a meeting of the local panchayat [village council] would be called the next day to discuss the matter. There was also a report by the local intelligence unit that peace in the area could be disturbed. What if the panchayat had passed an order in response to the demolition?

It’s the time of roja [religious fasting in Islam] and people are in a religious mood. If something had happened, who would be responsible? I had to act to diffuse the matter.

WSJ: But according to local news reports, the district magistrate’s report says the wall was brought down by villagers and that Ms. Nagpal was not present.

Mr. Yadav: As I have said, we are investigating the matter. We will look into everything, including what the district magistrate has said in his report.

WSJ: Critics argue that you’ve rarely acted in the past when communal riots have broken out in Uttar Pradesh. But in this case, your government was very quick to suspend Ms. Nagpal. Why was she treated differently?

Mr. Yadav: My government has acted in many instances. We have suspended or transferred officials in Faizabad, and in another case in Mathura. We take action against any official who acts irresponsibly.

As chief minister, what else can I do? If you don’t do your work properly, what can I do?

In Ms. Nagpal’s case, I gave her the opportunity to work in an important place. She was a young officer and her husband requested me to post her in Greater Noida. Now I’m wondering if I made a mistake by taking that decision. [WSJ: Ms. Nagpal’s husband could not be reached for comment. It was not possible to independently verify if he was involved in the decision to post Ms. Nagpal to Greater Noida.]

WSJ: The media, activists and some politicians have come out in strong support of Ms. Nagpal. How would you respond to them?

Mr. Yadav: There are some who want to bring down my government. To them, the question of Bodoland, where hundreds of people are agitating [for a separate state,] is not a big issue. The question of Telangana, where a state [Andhra Pradesh] was torn apart, is not a big issue. To them, only one sub-divisional magistrate’s suspension is a big issue.

We never stopped Ms. Nagpal from doing her work. In fact, we gave her a free hand. But who asked her to spoil the environment of communal harmony?

WSJ: Local media reports say Ms. Nagapl was targeted for fighting the politically connected sand mafia in Uttar Pradesh. Could you respond to those allegations?

Mr. Yadav: My government is taking action elsewhere in Uttar Pradesh to stop illegal sand mining. Uttar Pradesh is a state with a lot of riverbeds, so this problem exists. We have to continue to stop it.

But we never restricted Ms. Nagpal in her work. We didn’t even know she was taking steps to stop this illegality, if in fact she was. Her suspension had nothing to do with the sand mining issue.

WSJ: You mentioned that it is important to understand the ground reality in Uttar Pradesh. Are communal tensions a rampant problem?

Mr. Yadav: Yes. Also, the way we see it, some political leaders and groups are getting involved in small conflicts and escalating these problems.

The Bharatiya Janata Party [India’s main opposition party] and other allied groups have been trying to create this atmosphere.

More In Durga-Shakti-Nagpal

WSJ: Political activists say your government regularly uses transfers and suspensions as a tool to punish civil servants who are not pliable. What do you say to media reports that suggest transfers take place frequently in your state?

Mr. Yadav: Uttar Pradesh is a very large state, larger [in population] than Brazil. We need to move people around to run the administration smoothly. If so many transfers were taking place in Delhi, I would understand the concern, because Delhi is a small place.

During the previous government, very few transfers took place, so many officials remained in the same positions for years. Also, in many cases, husbands and wives were posted separately. They wanted to stay with their families, so we needed to transfer them.

So many officers go for training, here and abroad. I need to replace them. So many officers are promoted. I have to fill their place. During the Kumbh festival [in January, we moved many good officers there and organized a smooth festival.]

Now why should I leave them there? If you don’t shift people, how will the government function?

I suspend non-performing officials. If you are not doing the work, you are supposed to do, why are you an Indian Administrative Services officer [a civil servant]? If you don’t meet the poor and work for them, what can I do? You are here to help me, not to stop my work.

The central government recently complained that money given to Uttar Pradesh for a jobs guarantee program was not being spent fully. [In response] I asked for my administration for a list of the 10 worst performing chief development officers and served them notices.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit www.djreprints.com.